|Page 1 of 21:||          |
|Index||205 reviews in total|
Right off the bat, I will answer one question I know many are dying to
have answered: Did this one follow the book more? The answer: Yes . . .
I never hated the first movie for all of its deviations from the source material, but I can understand that some did. If the alterations made to the first movie annoyed you beyond belief, just know now that this movie only makes a slightly larger attempt to stick with Rick Riordan's material and you will probably not enjoy this movie much better than the first. If loyalty to the source material is not your first priority, I'd recommend you investigate this movie. You might just find yourself enjoying it.
The plot: Percy and his friends embark on a quest to save their home from being overrun by monsters. To do this, they must dive into the heart of the Sea of Monsters and retrieve a mythical object, The Golden Fleece, that has the power to restore power to the shields that protect their home.
-Not enough time spent actually in the Sea of Monsters.
-A few corny lines of dialogue
-CGI wasn't always top-notch
-A few scenes left me wondering "what was the point of that?"
-The lack of Chris Beck's wonderful musical score, even though the new composer was alright.
+Lots of laughs
+Good character development
+The characters in the movie were all true to their book counterparts, even if a good piece of the plot wasn't
+A welcome amount of heartfelt moments
+Alexandra Daddario's beautiful eyes
Okay, that last one was just for me.
All around, it's a fun movie. The crowd that loves this movie will consist mostly of those who enjoyed the first movie, but anyone might as well check it out. There's a good chance you will be pleasantly surprised. (After all, how many movies are there to see in August? Really?)
Alright, Fox! Bring on "Titan's Curse!"
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
If you haven't read the books, the review is not for you. This movie is enjoyable and entertaining for an action movie, and there are funny parts as well as suspenseful parts. If you have read the books, however, here you go. I'm just going to cut straight to the point here - this movie was a joke. From the acting to the attempt to bring Rick Riordan's world to life, everything was wrong. So wrong, in fact, that after the movie finished I sat there in stunned silence thinking, "That's it?". I didn't go in this movie with high expectations since the first movie was such a disaster. However, I thought that since Annabeth's hair was blonde and the trailer looked promising, this movie would be at least better than the first one. I was wrong. Let's just start with the actors; the only two that impressed me with their performances were Leven Rambin as Clarisse and Stanley Tucci as Mr. D. Even though Leven didn't look the part, her sarcasm and fieriness matched the Clarisse in the books. Mr. D was perfect, I only wish he had been in the first movie. The rest of the actors were either horrible or just mediocre. Logan Lerman was a bore as Percy, barely able to be the witty smart-aleck from the books. Brandon T. Jackson was simply a comedic relief and nothing else. I saw none of Grover's personality in him. Douglas Smith, while a good actor by himself, didn't play the Tyson I imagined. He was smart, spoke clearly, and was even attractive with two eyes. Come on Thor Freudenthal, can you cast anyone who isn't remotely good-looking? The worst was Alexandria Daddadrio. She conveyed no emotion, her lines were monotone, and the way she played the damsel-in-distress, Percy-obsessed girl was so unnatural. Since when is Annabeth the one who needs saving? Anyways, I know that book-to-movie adaptations are incredibly hard to cast, so pushing aside the disappointments with that, lets just go to the storyline. The beginning was good. I thought it was sensible, for time's sake, to cut out the whole dodge ball game at the beginning of the book and introduce Tyson in another way. The flashback to the original trio was good, the bull fight was just how I imagined it, but Grover shouldn't have been there. He should've been already away, looking for Pan. I don't understand why they had to have him in camp; this was honestly such a simple thing they could've done to please the fans. Chiron's exile from the camp was also a simple touch they could've added. Once they go on the quest however, everything turns into a big mess. Grover getting captured by Luke? Finding Clarisse in the stomach of Scylla? All of a sudden, Clarisse is agreeing with everything Percy says? Then, the most disappointing part of all, the entire Circe's island scene was skipped along with the siren scene, which was a major development point for Percy and Annabeth's relationship (but I guess they don't need any development since they had them almost kissing at the end of The Lightning Thief). The dramatic and highly unnecessary amusement park scenes with Luke were so ridiculous they had me laughing. Why did Kronos come out in his full form, and why on Earth was Percy able to defeat him with a simple slash of his sword? That made no sense at all and I'm sure that even non-book readers would be confused at how a sword, even a "cursed sword" could immediately defeat the most powerful Titan with one cut. Also, has nobody realized that the Iris message has been completely ignored in this movie and the previous? Why leave out a form of communication so vital to the books? Lastly, something that wasn't necessary but would've added a lot more comedy to the movie than Grover's lame one-liner's were the "party ponies" who rescue Percy at the end. The reviving of Thalia was well done, although I don't understand Clarisse and Percy's sudden bonding. In the books, those two hate each other for all five books, and I can never remember them exchanging a smile or an understanding nod. In conclusion, I felt almost as though the director was trying to stray as far as the book as possible. Why couldn't they have curled Annabeth's hair, had Tyson have slow and slurred speech, added the search for Pan to the story, and so many other little things that may have made up for the scene skipping and melodramatic almost- deaths. If you love the books, I say stay as far away from this movie as possible, unless you want to go home with a yearn to reread the entire series just to remind yourself of the characters and story and get the awful portrayal out of your mind. That's all I have to say.
My expectations were very low for this movie. The reviews were rotten,
I could tell it was nothing like the book from just the trailer, and it
was cut from the ugly cloth of the Lightning Thief movie, despite both
films being based upon source material with limitless potential. After
watching this movie in the theater and bracing for Logan Lerman's
flawless portrayal of dirt, I ended up getting thrown a real treat.
Not to say it was a really good movie. The acting ranged from good to sickening. The plot was already cursed to be soiled due to the the first film's failure at adaptation. Half the characters introduced in the first novel, but not the first movie, came up this time. It was nice to have Mr. D and Clarisse, and even Chris Rodriguez, make an appearance on the screen. Despite this, the script itself was full of corny lines (mostly uttered through the mouths of Logan Lerman and Alexandra Daddario). Some of my favorite script moments were Tyson's little comments here and there,("At least there's no line." and when he sings an all too familiar song...)and then Hermes(Nathan Fillion) was well adapted and written, and also portrayed well by the actor. Another thing to note was the film's overall humor. In the first film, the characters took the story so seriously, it was hilarious without their intention. In this film, the filmmakers, writers and actors, actually intend to have fun and be ridiculous, which makes the film more worthwhile.
I can't say the visual effects were the best, but they really weren't that bad. Many reviewers site "video-gamey" CGI. Well, if it's video game graphics, then it's the best video game graphics I've ever seen. They aren't super-realistic, but the special effects are decent.I have to point out that there was an awesome scene of CGI when the Oracle explains the story of Kronos to Percy. This scene was creative and well done, especially with it's stain-glass window style.
The film's score (composed by Andrew Lockington) was pretty epic, but not entirely memorable. It won't get much awards, but it was really well done and held the movie together.
Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters only settles for being an "okay" movie. There are constant deviations from the novel, only decent scripting, acting, visual effects, good music, and mixed acting. However, it is not a waste, especially for fans of Percy Jackson. I enjoyed the movie, and The Sea of Monsters is my favorite book, despite changes. Now that many characters and plot points have been set into place after being shattered y the first film, the makers of this film have paved a promising path for another film that may be even better than the first two.
This movie was a major disappointment in my opinion. I've read the books and I loved them so I thought the movie would be pretty good too! I was wrong. Problem one is that it was a little too slow. They could have easily shortened 10 to 15 minutes of this movie but yet unnecessary parts were added. Problem two is that the acting was just not good. They could have done a much better job and at least tried to act in character. The biggest problem is that this movie was just stupid. It took them up until the last 20 minutes to reach their destination and to get to the whole point. Up until then there were just time wasters. The only good thing about this film is the special effects. I saw this in 3-D and i give it applause for its amazing graphics and special effects. Other than that though, this movie isn't worth seeing, it has countless flaws and problems. Don't waste your money on it.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I just watched this movie earlier, and I did go into the movie screen
expecting not a lot as I hated the first one.
*NON-SPOILER* The first thing I noticed in the movie was the terrible CGI, that stuck out like a sore thumb among the background. And the next thing I noticed was the mediocre acting, worsened by the dozens of cheesy, humorless and cheesy one-liners throughout the movie.
*SPOILER* The story was downright predictable also, as it ended as most generic action/adventure movies ended, the bad guy releasing they had done bad and the main character killing the main baddie.
*NON-SPOILER* The only good thing in this movie I could think about was the locations the characters found themselves in. The locations ranged from cities, to woods to the middle of the ocean.
The main character, Percy Jackson is supposed to be the half-blood son of Poseidon (a water god) and barely uses water AT ALL throughout the movie to his advantage. *SPOILER* And an even particularly silly scene where they are about to be swallowed by a large water monster thing, the water powers Percy has don't actually 'work'.
All in all, this movie is a complete waste of money, complete with cheesy one-liners, boring story, tedious acting and just an all-over negative viewing experience.
I love the Percy Jackson books, it's one of my favourite book series.
Thought the first film was alright, but a mediocre version of the
books. When I heard that there was going to be a second one, I was very
skeptical that it would work considering the number of bad changes
they've done to the Lightning Thief.
But once I learned that screen writers Scott Alexander & Larry Karaszewski were hired to adapt it (who aren't credited for some reason), I began to feel hopeful for the Sea of Monsters. Alexander and Karaszewski had previously worked on the bio-pics Ed Wood, The People vs. Larry Flynt, and Man on the Moon. I thought that they'd look up the books and do justice to Percy Jackson.
Just came back from seeing it and I really like it, thought it was better than The Lightning Thief. I didn't think that it was a great film, some of the dialogue felt awkward to me, but overall I had fun and felt some justice was done. Yes, there was some changes made to the Sea of Monsters but nothing as bad as the previous film. I enjoyed watching Stanley Tucci (Mr. D), Anthony Stewart Head (Chiron), and Ron Perlman (Polyphemus).
Definitely see it if you like the books. Now I'm hoping to see the next films in the series!
The Camp Half-Blood is protected by Thalia, a daughter of Zeus that
sacrificed her life to save the young Annabeth, Grover and Luke from an
attack of Cyclops and was transformed by her father into a magical
tree. Out of the blue, Percy Jackson (Logan Lerman) is visited by his
unknown half- brother Cyclops Tyson (Douglas Smith) and they discover
that Thalia was poisoned and is dying. Then the camp is attacked by a
Colchis Bull but it is vanquished by Percy. Soon he learns that Luke
(Jake Abel) is the one that has poisoned the magical tree.
Annabeth (Alexandra Daddario) discovers the mystic Golden Fleece is capable to heal Thalia and save their camp. But Mr. D (Stanley Tucci) assigns the winner demigod Clarisse (Leven Rambin) to the quest of retrieving the magic fleece. However Percy Jackson, Annabeth, Grover and Tyson decide to follow an ancient prophecy and they go to the dangerous journey to the Sea of Monsters to recover the Golden Fleece from Luke that wants to revive the evil Kronos to destroy the Olympus.
"Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters" is a reasonable infantile adventure of the demigod son of Poseidon Percy Jackson. The beautiful Clarisse is an unpleasant character and Percy Jackson is a weak hero; Tyson is too dumb and Grover is funny but coward. Therefore the only attractive character is Annabeth, gorgeous and strong. My vote is six.
Title (Brazil): "Percy Jackson e o Mar de Monstros" ("Percy Jackson and the Sea of Monsters")
Greek mythology returns in "Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters", the sequel
to 2010's "The Lightning Thief". Based on the novels by Rick Riordan,
the series puts a spin on the rich mythology by blending it with modern
society, which is kind of interesting.
The bulk of all the characters here are demigods/half-bloods (offspring of gods and humans). But the protagonist is Percy Jackson, a demigod son of Poseidon. Previously, he along with his besties Annabeth (daughter of Athena) and Grover (a satyr), stopped Luke, the Lightning thief, from destroying Olympus. Here, Camp Half-Blood (demigods' safe haven) are under threat after Thalia's tree, the boundary that protects the camp, is poisoned. The only thing that can heal it is the Golden Fleece which is located on an island in the Sea of Monsters, or what we like to call the Bermuda Triangle.
The movie is quite action-packed and pits our hero against a variety of Greek monsters. I loved the scene where the half-bloods had to face the Colchis bull. The mechanical bull was quite extraordinary and that scene was entertaining. However, I felt that the climax was a bit of a letdown as all the tension that had been generated zipped away so quickly.
Characters come and go. In "Sea of Monsters", much of the ensemble cast that make up the deities from the previous film are absent. We will see no more of Zeus (Sean Bean), Poseidon (Kevin McKidd), Hades (Steve Coogan), Persephone (Rosario Dawson), and Chiron (Pierce Brosnan). That means most of the experienced actors are out (not to forget Uma Thurman as Medusa). In replacement, we get Dionysus portrayed by the reliable Stanley Tucci. The gods Hermes and Chiron have replacements (Nathan Fillion and Anthony Head, respectively). We also have the clumsy but humble Tyson (Douglas Smith), Percy's cyclops half-brother, and the self-eccentric Clarisse La Rue (Leven Rambin), demigod daughter of Ares.
The movie had lots of scenes involving special effects. It was okay but it wasn't excellent. Some of the creatures were stunning (the hippocampus was amazing and eye-candy) whereas some looked pretty cheap and effortless (Kronos).
Under the direction of a new director, the movie is more faithful to the source compared to the first movie's similarity to the book (although by a tiny bit). But that's not to say some of the scenes diverge from he book. The movie is quite well-paced and during the ride, there are plenty of laughs to enjoy.
Overall, "Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters" is quite an enjoyable film. It's not better than the first and it's not worse than the first. It has quite an interesting premise and some fine action sequences.
Final Verdict: "Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters" is a decent sequel that provides plenty of action scenes and laughs, with passable acting and okay visual effects.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
To start off, it was a really great movie that never failed to keep me
entertained. There were, however; some bad aspects of this movie. The
acting was well above average, though some characters came off as a bit
corny in some of the dialogue that I believed could be said in a much
better way or expression to tone down the corniness.
I have not read the books so I cannot judge how the characters portrayed their book counterparts but I will take the word of many reviewers on this title and agree with them on this issue. But, even without reading the books I couldn't imagine a better set of young actors for the roles. The actress who played "Clarisse" - Leven Rambin, mostly caught my eye with her acting. She was superb in the role as Clarisse and every scene she did was great.
Some moments or events in the movie were fairly predictable. And the idea of the movie seemed to follow every other film in the "The Main Characters never die"...The sad moments in the movie were immediately changed to bring happiness to the audience but in my opinion, I would like a little tragedy in such films.
A boy, the son of Poseidon, faces a quest to help save his home. The antagonist made such a brief appearance in the film and the problem was dealt with fairly easily. Almost, too good that there wasn't such big trouble going against the "evil boss"...But I am sure we haven't seen the end of him. I am anxiously waiting for the next movie as the story is simply great, exciting, and entertaining.
I just went today to see this movie in the theater and I actually came out of the movie feeling pretty satisfied and not at all disappointed. I chose this movie over The GetAway and I was glad I made the choice considering the rating and reviews I saw for that movie.
In summary: The actors were great, the dialogue was good except for some corny parts that definitely needed a look over. The story is simply perfect and the whole rating of the movie was good. You would love this movie if you really liked the first part. Definitely a Film Series worth watching.
It's refreshing to see a relatively non violent adventure fantasy
suitable for younger audiences again. Yet older audiences can enjoy it
too. I actually prefer the story to the Hunger Games stories with all
The effects and creatures are slightly fake and unreal looking but it adds to the charm. Cute blending of mythology and the present story.
Logan Lerman still looks young enough for the role but Alexandra Daddario is looking a bit older.
I remember enjoying the first one slightly more with the novelty of the characters but this one is alright enough.
|Page 1 of 21:||          |
|Plot summary||Plot synopsis||Ratings|
|Awards||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Official site||Plot keywords||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|